Clinical decisions and biomedical research rely significantly on imaging the architecture and morphology of tissues. Unfortunately, tissues have little contrast in brightfield optical imaging (FIG. 1A), and require the use of stains or dyes to provide contrast. Contrast agents include those that highlight morphology as well as those that highlight specific molecular species, usually using immunohistochemical (IHC) techniques (Dabbs, Diagnostic Immunohistochemistry: Theranostic and Genomic Applications—Expert Consult., Elsevier Health Sciences, 2010). The use of staining is especially critical in histopathologic analyses that are the gold standard for the diagnoses of many diseases, including cancer, and for most tissue research. Usually, the pathologist examines tissue architecture and histology (cell types) to provide an initial diagnosis which may be augmented by modern computerized analyses (Camp et al., Nat Med 8:1323-8, 2002). In some cases, confirmatory IHC staining may be employed to determine appropriate therapy or to improve diagnostic accuracy or to guide appropriate therapy. While advances have been made (Ruifrok et al., Anal Quant Cytol Histol 23:291-9, 2001; Taylor et al., Histopathology 49:411-24, 2006), the time required for staining and expense of obtaining multiple stains can be a limiting factor and inconsistent staining due to a variety of technological and tissue factors is problematic (Goldstein et al., Appl. Immunohistochem. Mol. Morphol. 15:124-33, 2007). Staining patterns in some cases need to be interpreted in the context of multiple stains or appropriate morphologic visualization to be effective (Varma et al., Histopathology 47:1-16, 2005), compounding the need for multiplex marker staining and further interpretation.